Jump to content

osahoniyamu

Member
  • Content Count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

osahoniyamu last won the day on February 25 2016

osahoniyamu had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

46 Good

About osahoniyamu

  • Rank
    Varsity
  • Birthday 10/08/1999

Profile Information

  • Name
    [Manifestation of Gawd]
  • School
    Ardrey Kell High
  • Biography
    3rd year Varsity Debater

Recent Profile Visitors

1967 profile views
  1. osahoniyamu

    K affs?

    So I'm entering in my 3rd year in debate this year at a new school and I'm starting to look at some lit for the China topic this year and My question: Are there any K aff (or good affs if there aren't any good K affs) I can read for this year's resolution besides Model Minority Ks and such. I don't know how I'd be able to run any K topics without linking to arguments like the "Speaking for Others K." (I'm black). Any ideas? I'm down on cutting my own if there are none online where I can get cards from
  2. Best Aff Islamophobia or Insider Threats Worst Aff Blockchain and TSA Won't miss TSA, NSA, Encryption, Drones, Funny rounds Debated Kyler and Colin at Bentonville. We read the wrong answer to their link argument on the whiteness k and we ended up making many disney and fairy tale references in our final rebuttal speeches fun times. Also the time we debated against teams who read satire neg cases and such those were good times.
  3. In the context of Marx, the bourgeoisie is the middle class of people in France during the time prior to the revolution. The capitalist middle class exploited the proletariat (labor class) and made profits off them. Marx knew that the capitalist system depended on the proletariat for work and he predicted that the proletariat would overthrow the capitalist society which it caused on its own. This would then create a new type of economic/government system which became known as communism. In the case of K debate, I've never seen the word being coined to describe the capitalist society of the United States today but I guess you could branch out on the topic and explain how the bourgeoisie perpetuates capitalism (or something like that).
  4. Pragmatic legal solutions are key – anything else devolves into theoretical abstraction which never actualizes material change Cohen 15 — Julie E. Cohen, Mark Claster Mamolen Professor of Law and Technology at the Georgetown University Law Center, Member of the Advisory Board of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, holds a J.D. from Harvard University, 2015 (“Studying Law Studying Surveillance,” Surveillance & Society, Volume 13, Issue 1, Available Online at http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/surveillance-and-society/article/viewFile/law/lawsurv, Accessed 07-21-2015, p. 96-97) Surveillance Studies and Law Relative to legal scholarship, work in Surveillance Studies is more likely to build from a solid foundation in contemporary social theory. Even so, such work often reflects both an insufficient grasp of the complexity of the legal system in action and lack of interest in the ways that legal and regulatory actors understand, conduct, and contest surveillance. By this I don’t mean to suggest that Surveillance Studies scholars need law degrees, but only to point out what ought to be obvious but often isn’t: legal processes are social processes, too, and in overlooking these processes, Surveillance Studies scholars also engage in a form of black-boxing that treats law as monolithic and surveillance and government as interchangeable. Legal actors engage in a variety of discursive and normative strategies by which institutions and resources are mobilized around surveillance, and understanding those strategies is essential to the development of an archaeology of surveillance practices. Work in Surveillance Studies also favors a type of theoretical jargon that can seem impenetrable and, more importantly, unrewarding to those in law and policy communities. As I’ve written elsewhere (Cohen 2012a: 29), “[t]oo many such works find power everywhere and hope nowhere, and seem to offer well-meaning policy makers little more than a prescription for despair.” Returning to the topics already discussed, let us consider some ways in which Surveillance Studies might benefit from dialogue with law. Let us return first to the problem of digitally-enhanced surveillance by law enforcement—the problem of the high-resolution mosaic. As discussed in the section above, works by Surveillance Studies scholars exploring issues of mobility and control offer profound insights into the ways in which continual observation shapes spaces and subjectivities—the precise questions about which, as we have already seen, [end page 96] judges and legal scholars alike are skeptical. Such works reveal the extent to which pervasive surveillance of public spaces is emerging as a new and powerful mode of ordering the public and social life of civil society. They offer rich food for thought—but not for action. Networked surveillance is increasingly a fact of contemporary public life, and totalizing theories about its power don’t take us very far toward gaining regulatory traction on it. That enterprise is, moreover, essential even if it entails an inevitable quantum of self-delusion. Acknowledgment of pervasive social shaping by networked surveillance need not preclude legal protection for socially-shaped subjects, but that project requires attention to detail. To put the point a different way, the networked democratic society and the totalitarian state may be points on a continuum rather than binary opposites, but the fact that the continuum exists is still worth something. If so, one needs tools for assessment and differentiation that Surveillance Studies does not seem to provide. As an example of this sort of approach within legal scholarship, consider a recent article by legal scholars Danielle Citron and David Gray (2013), which proposes that courts and legislators undertake what they term a technology-centered approach to regulating surveillance. They would have courts and legislators ask whether particular technologies facilitate total surveillance and, if so, act to put in place comprehensive procedures for approving and overseeing their use. From a Surveillance Studies perspective, this approach lacks theoretical purity because its technology-specific focus appears to ignore the fact that total surveillance also can emerge via the fusion of data streams originating from various sources. But the proposal is pragmatic; it does not so much ignore that risk as bracket it while pursuing the narrower goal of gaining a regulatory foothold within the data streams. And because it focuses on the data streams themselves, it is administrable in a way that schemes based on linear timelines and artificial distinctions between different types of surveillance are not. One can envision both courts and legislatures implementing the Citron and Gray proposal in a way that enables far better oversight of what law enforcement is doing.
  5. osahoniyamu

    Preciado

    Can anyone explain some of his theoretical ideas to me? How Preciado args are usually run in rounds? No idea what pharma-porn is either.
  6. It's not as effective if you're white because you kinda link back but afropess is basically saying that modern surveillance was created on the plantations which separated us as an “enslaveable object.” Basically the aff causes black antagonization because black ontology is already hyper visible. The aff causes white supremacy to thrive under the wraps of violence against colored people. The aff trying to solve racism is impossible under the sovereign. The aff causes a shift in this system which reinvents slavery in different ways. At least those are the ways I've heard the k(s) run before
  7. I have one but I don't have a bunch of links for this year
  8. 1) We meet “its” state and local authorities are granted by the USFGIHA 12-Independence Hall Association (“State and Local Government”, 13 August 2012,Indepence Hall Association http://www.ushistory.org/gov/12.asp)//YI Local governments are generally organized into four types: Governorship can often be an opportunity to pursue higher office; several state Governors have gone on to become President. Before he became one of the most notable chief executives of the century, Franklin Roosevelt served as Governor of New York. Counties. Counties are usually the largest political subdivisions, and their primary function is to administer state laws within their borders. Among other duties, they keep the peace, maintain jails, collect taxes, build and repair roads and bridges, and record deeds, marriages, and deaths. Elected officials called Supervisors or Commissioners usually lead counties. Townships. These units of government do not exist in about half the states, and they have different responsibilities in those that have them. A township may simply be another name for a town or city, or it may be a subdivision of a county. Special Districts. These units of government have special functions. The best known example is the local school district, but other types are growing in numbers, especially in heavily populated areas where county and city governments may be overloaded with work. Municipalities. City, town, or borough governments get their authority to rule only as it is granted by the Federal Government. Today about 80% of the American population lives in municipalities, and municipal governments affect the lives of many citizens. Municipalities may have elected mayors, or they may be managed by appointed city managers. The organization of state and local governments varies widely across the United States. They have common specific features, but their organizations differ. Regardless of their design, state and local governments often have a far greater impact on people's lives than the federal government. Marriage, birth, and death certificates. School policies. Driving age and qualifications for licensure. Laws regarding theft, rape, and murder, as well as the primary responsibility of protecting citizens from criminals. These critical issues and many others are not decided by distant Washington authorities, but by state and local officials. 2) Counter-interp: Permitting makes projects federal – legal definitions concurCalloway 97 - adjunct professor of Environmental Law at the Thomas M. Cooley Law School (Cheryl, “The "Human Environment" Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act: Implications for Environmental Justice,” 1997 Det. C.L. Rev. 1147)//BB Other activities which courts have deemed "major federal action" include the grant of a license to construct a high voltage line, 34 the issuance of an interim operating license for a nuclear power plant, 35 and the authorization for the abandonment of a railroad line. 36 Even when the project is constructed with non-federal funds, federal government action may rise to the level of a "major action" if it makes possible significant effects on the human environment. 37 In City of Atlanta v. United States, 38 the court held that the [1157] Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) installation of navigational equipment and adoption of flight procedures constituted "major federal action," even though the airport runway expansion was not funded by the federal government. 39 These steps taken by the FAA made possible increased air and noise pollution. 40 "[A] non-federal project is considered a 'federal action' if it cannot begin or continue without prior approval by a federal agency and the agency possesses authority to exercise discretion over the outcome."
  9. I have stuff I'm willing to trade as well
  10. Wilderson and Mbembe are good for structural racism and marx, smith, and giroux for cap
  11. This sounds awful tbh running this argument kills education and really doesn't allow real debate to flourish. Evidence is necessary for change to really happen
  12. http://hspolicy.debatecoaches.org/Little+Rock+Central/Williams-Woods+Neg The worm is somewhere in there
  13. Cutting your own aff would be the most sufficient but if you wanted to run an aff that's easy to understand yet not to common you should run some kind of race aff maybe antiblackness, model minority, or islamophobia. However don't use them if you're white because they kind of link back to you unless u want to consider yourself ontologically black, asian, etc. in round. Whistleblowers and encryption affs have been pretty good when written well.
  14. Troll? Most judges won't even vote for inherency anyway at least from my experience
  15. He means glang as in g-lang. Gendered Language
×
×
  • Create New...